Monday, May 19, 2014

19 A simple mathematical logical reasoning solution of Rubik's cube. Groups of piecewise symmetries of graphs, lattices, (aperiodic) tilings and polyhedrons ( twisty and sliding puzzles and cellular automatons ). A general method of solution of such puzzles. The 18th problem of Hilbert.


Here we describe in simple details how one could solve the Rubik's cube, if e.g. he was Rubik himself, and no one had solve it before, by using only logical reasoning not memory or much time to spent. Let us assume that one cannot use the web or youtube and forums to find ready-made recipes and algorithms to solve the cube. In addition let us assume that he does not have much time to spent by experimenting randomly. And finally let us assume that he can use existing  simple not too complicated mathematics for this purpose. Actually as Jaapsch remarks in his page http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/thistle.htm , there is the mathematical solution of Morwen B. Thistlethwaite who is a mathematician who devised a clever algorithm for solving the Rubik's Cube in remarkably few moves. It is a rather complicated method, and therefore cannot be memorized. It is only practical for computers and not for humans. Furthermore even the fundamental theorem of the permutation group of the Rubik's cube as formulated e.g. by W.D. Joyner in (http://www.permutationpuzzles.org/rubik/webnotes/rubik.pdf ) in one of its directions is utilizing findings of difficult algorithms of practitioners, that cannot be found easily by just playing with the cube. Can we find a mathematical logical reasoning solution without having to utilize computer calculations and complicated computational group theory?   Is it possible with the above assumptions to solve the Rubik's cube? The answer is yes, and we will show how. The general concept is to start from the  initial "scramble generators" of the permutation group of the puzzle  (e. g. rotation of one only  face in Rubik's cube ) which are in general moving many elements of the puzzle, thus are simple global action  , and are easy to scramble the puzzle , but not easy to solve the puzzle through them. Then we try to find by reasoning and simple mathematics  the  "solution generators" that have simple local action  (e.g. a 3 cycle for all  even permutations or a transposition 2-cycle for both even and odd permutations) but are still generators of the permutation group of  the puzzle, and then solve the puzzle with the obvious and no-thinking way through the solution-generators (and their conjugates).  Furthermore this strategy and method can solve simultaneously most of the other twisty or sliding and permutation puzzles.  I consider this as the true solution of Rubik's cube and the other permutation puzzles, as puzzle of logic, otherwise current attitudes make it a skill of fingers. 
In particular in at least the case of the Rubik cube we give a sequence of arguments, that from the Scramble generators, we discover and calculate the solution generators, which in this case are either 3-cycles, or pairs of 2-cycles on fundamental regions (=stickers) as the simplest possible action that can derive any other action. Etc We must not confuse the simplest possible action on stickers with the simplest possible finger-movement. 
The situation can be compared with the 2nd-order algebraic equation. It is different for someone to give to him the formula of the two roots ( which corresponds here to give to him the recipe of how the solution generators, can be executed from the simplest finger or scramble turns) from giving him a logical way of how to discover the formulae of the two roots from the original equation with simple logical reasoning. (which corresponds here to showing a simple sequence of reasoning, of how to discover the solution generators). 

Also we introduce here a rather new class of finite non-commutative rings, based on the action of any finite permutation group and in particular of groups of partial or piece-wise symmetries of graphs. Partial symmetries of restricted support are extended as identity on the whole of the graph and its set of sub-graphs. A partial symmetry of a graph or tiling has stabilizer all the graph (tiling) and acts on  the support as permutations of a set of sub-graphs (sub-tilings).  Therefore we get again groups that act as permutations of a set of sub-graphs (sub-tiling) of the initial graph (or tiling). To illustrate better the action of such groups of partial or part-wise or piece-wise  automorphism of graphs , a tiling or lattices we introduce cellular automatons  that represent the action of each generator and  elements of such groups of piece-wise automorphims. 
(For cellular automatons see e.g. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CellularAutomaton.html ).
 The elements that the permutation acts , the permutations themselves and all subsets of them are exactly the elements of such a ring. The elements  that the permutation acts on and their subsets constitute a normal commutative sub-ring. The boundary topological operator induces a corresponding to the algebraic entities. Thus it defines a new type of homology.
 In particular we define such  permutation rings for any Graph cycling puzzle as introduced by R.D. Wilson in " Graph puzzles homotopy and the Alternating group" JOURNAL OF COMBINATORIAL THEORY (R) 16, 86-96 (1974)  http://www2.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~ki/teaching/ss12/readinggroup/private/wilson-combtheo1974.pdf
We solve most well known of them through these rings.
We give a general definition of a puzzle or game on a graph or lattice with a group derived from groups of  piece-wise symmetries of a graph , lattice or tiling, or polyhedron and we give a general solution for a wide class of them.  This general solution method derives the solution of most of the known puzzles but also for many more that have not been materialized.
Permutation rings can be defined also for any polyherdron through the graph of their edges/vertices and faces. In particular we present some such rings for the Platonic  Archimedian polyhedrons, and the Spherical Harmonic nodal patterns. All the above rings may be used also to create a large class of permutation polyhedral twisty and sliding puzzles (like Rubik;s cube and many more) that can be realized at least with software. 

Finally it is given a necessary and sufficient condition for a planar or 3-dimensional polyhedral tile t to tile to a tiling T the 2-dimensional plane or 3-space, either in a periodic or in an a-periodic way (this is related to the 2nd part of the Hilbert problem 18) . This condition is with a dependence system D(t) of cycles of piece-wise congruence  of parts of the boundary of the tile t and a corresponding group G(t) and ring R(t) . These are related to the corresponding groups G(T) and ring R(T) of all the tiling. Of course this does not mean that this condition can be easily used to discover such tiles in a computational or non-computational way, neither easily used to tile the space in to a tiling T once the tile t is known. It is simply a logical equivalent to the definition of a plane or space filler,  with different more algebraic terms. The tiling and its piece-wise isometries define also a combinatorial specie  (also a category) see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_species and http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Species.html that transfers properties from geometry to action groups and permutations. 

Thursday, January 30, 2014

18. Advantages of applications in other Sciences of the Digital or Democritus Mathematics


The abstraction of the infinite seems sweet and greedy at the beginning as it reduces some complexity, in the definitions, but later on when it comes for the proofs, it turns out to be bitter, as it traps the mathematical minds in to a vast complexity irrelevant to real life applications.


At first I must say that as a student I was enjoying the infinite , and I was excited by it, while as a University professor of later I even contributed to the transfinite numbers ( I had introduced the Ordinal Real numbers see e.g. here http://www.ckscientific.com/Infinity2.htm


Also I am very well aware of its history (Logicism  of Frege, Constructivism. Formalism of Hilbert etc, story of Cantor etc)., And I am aware of what you may think as benefits of it. The main benefit is that it creates a distance of your mind and the self from  the physical reality.....And believe it or not in some situations this may be precious in order to be able to think fast and free.   I changed my mind about the infinite year later when I was involved to more substantial contributions of mathematics to other sciences and society.
The infinite is a  sweet greedy abstraction at the beginning which seems to simplify in an elegant way the definitions but it turn out to be a horrible boomerang 
When it comes to proofs, and traps the mathematical mind, to complexities irrelevant to applications. The abstraction of the infinite is of less developed mentality compared to the current situation of our civilization. It is an abstraction of a mind which 
1) Does not know , that physical matter, and the continuum of the physical matter is made from finite many atoms or particles (like the electrons).

2)  It is not aware of the computer science, how all continuous  images in the screen and digital cinema are made from finite many pixels etc In the power point at the link at the end you may find a dozen of reasons why mathematics have to be upgraded to new mathematics without the infinite.

Here are some 
1) The real numbers with the infinite many digits if attempted to be represented in a computer will create a virus or worm 
2) When you teach new students about the limits and derivatives they look at you with surprise, they seem to understand nothing, while we could simply teach them that the dx is a real number with finite many digits which is zero in single precision but non-zero in double precision
and the dy/dx is non-zero in single precision 
3) In functional analysis you have a hell of situations with the unbounded operators, where you almost cannot prove nothing, while with digital functions, the functional linear space is of finite dimension (not infinite) thus all proofs are easier
4) You have the 3rd Hilbert problem of polyhedral that are of equal volume and still they cannot be decomposed in to an equal number of equal other polyhedra (in physical reality this is not existent) WHY ON EARTH THE MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF A PHYSICAL REALITY SITUATION HAS TO BE MORE COMPLEX THAT THE REALITY ITSELF? ONLY THE INFINITE MAKES IT SO!

5) You have crazy situations with the axiom of choice in infinite many point sets, where you can decompose a geometric sphere in to finite many pieces , re-combine them and obtain two equal spheres, and equal to the initial as if you were a magician?

6) It is supposed that there geometric constructions with ruler and compass that are impossible, like squaring he circle , while in a digital geometry where all distances are rational (all rational numbers are constructible with ruler and compass) such problems would be constructible.

7) Goedels theorem a terribly pessimistic theorem for the rational thinking is possible only because of infinite many logical propositions, while in digital logic, thinks are more optimistic and possible

etc 
IN SHORT THE ABSTRACTION OF THE INFINITE IS OLD-FASHIONED ARTISTIC ABSTRACTION CREATES PROBLEMS HAS ISOLATED MATHEMATICIANS FROM OTHER SCIENTISTS AND THE 21ST CENTURY MATHEMATICS NEED UPGRADING TO MORE MATURE MATHEMATICS WITHOUT THE INFINITE.

If you simply , create finite digital-models within the mathematics of infinite sets, for practical applications, is not a clean solution because you mix again the infinite in the arguments and definitions (even so as to control the finite) which makes a slippery way again. The clean solution is to re-create , re--found with new axioms the basic University mathematics, as upgrade to the old mathematics, without the infinite. It is an effort with a  little more laborious definitions, but the effort is worth it, as the proofs become natural and easier in the end. In fact my initial term for such mathematics without the infinite was NATURAL MATHEMATICS . But I do not want to be one-sided only and only against the mathematics with the infinite. I believe that BOTH  are necessary in the evolution of the civilization. At first the mathematics with the infinite, with their great advantage: They keep the mind and self far away from the material reality (And believe me this is precious for fast and free thinking.) But once we have a whole new world of the technology of digital-everything, I think it is time to upgrade the mathematics to the new, greater, both more complex and simpler, the mathematics without the infinite. And this I believe is real need, that is why we have created this blog 

I do not say that infinity must nor remain. It has played a useful historic role so far, and it will remain. But sciences as well as mathematics are evolving, and we need to go one in new mathematics defining an interval (0,1) that at definite resolution , has only finite many points, both visible and invisible, otherwise we are in the unrealistic fiction  area  as far as engineering and applications is concerned. Still the old-fashioned interval (0,1) of uncountable many points will remain for historic and museum reasons, (as we still have the old physics of fluids, without atoms, in thermodynamics when the civilization did not know what atoms are and how finite many of them make the objects of our world. If we do not realize that the absence of some decent and realistic digital mathematics are precious for a smooth evolution of physics, inventions and the civilization, we are simply too much conformists, and too much looking back instead of looking ahead. The infinite continuum of classical real numbers is one only without layers, and we need for physics a multi-layered or a (finite )sequence of different resolutions continuums, the one embedded in the other, the one denser from the other. Why? Because this is  the mathematically correct way to discover, the physics of the fields (electromagnetic and gravitational) as a second density or second resolution physical material reality of finer free permanent particles and not as energy in the "vacuum" (the only free permanent particles in physics so far is the electron/proton/neutron, all other are not free or non-permanent) And discovering the 2nd field-continuum of the physical reality we may solve many practical problems like clean energy, new healing methods etc.

The situation is partly similar , to the time a little before Cartesious introduced, the Analytic Euclidean geometry with the 3-coordinates. Imagine him, discussing in a place like this, and other people arguing that "We do not need a new coordinate geometry as you say, where lines are linear equations (what an ugly idea!) or intersection of planes as solutions of linear systems! (what  a cumbersome concept!) etc. We are good with our visual lines, and triangles and planes, and this is the geometry that will remain, and dear Cartesious you are missing the point: Everything   is perfect and good as it is, we need nothing more!. But the truth is that yes, mathematics was needing analytic Cartesian geometry which made a breakthrough in engineering applications, architecture, civil  engineering etc. And there is a similar situation with the classical analogue mathematics of the infinite, and some new digital mathematics that we do not have yet. And I mean mathematics not computer programming and software engineering, because in these disciplines they have already discovered and use digital mathematics, without saying that they are mathematics.   But why need be a computer programmer or software engineer to know how to do it? Don't mathematicians and high school pupils deserve to know with clarity how to do it too? Don'w we want to know how a software engineer conceived the finite digital ontology (in mathematical definitions) of the linear intervals of say the next beautiful musical score animation? 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Xu2cSEko6M

Comparisons of the classical analogue and the new digital mathematics

Analogue Mathematics
Physical Reality Irrelevant complexity. The model of reality may be more complex than reality itself.
The infinite “feels” good
Hard to understand mechanism of limits,approximations and not easy to teach
Pessimistic theorems (Goedel, paradoxes, many axioms etc)
Difficult proofs
Many never proved conjectures
Simple algebra of closure of operations
Absence of the effects of multi-resolution continuum

Digital Mathematics
Physical Reality Relevant complexity
No infinite only finite invisible resolution. Realistic
No limits, or approximations,only pixels and points, easy to teach
Optimistic facts (realistic balance of “having” resources and “being able to derive” in results. Less axioms)
Easier proofs (a new method induction on the pixels)
Famous conjectures are easier to prove or disprove
Not simple algebra of closure of operations. Internal-external entities.
A new enhanced reality of multi-resolution continuum







The effect in applied sciences of the Digital mathematics

Meteorology
Physics
Biology
Engineering
Ecology
Sociology
Economics

More realistic
Ontology closer to that as represented in an computer operating system
Faster to run computations in computers
Easier cooperation among physical scientists-mathematicians-software engineers
Easier learning of the digital mathematics

Any additional complexity is a reality relevant complexity not reality irrelevant complexity.










References




1) Rozsa Peter “Playing with Infinity” Dover Publications 1961
2) R. L. Wilder “Evolution of mathematical Concepts”  Transworld  Publishers LTD 1968
3) Howard Eves “An Introduction to the History of Mathematics”,4th edition 1953 Holt Rinehart and Winston publications
4) Howard Eves  “Great Moments in Mathematics”  The Mathematical Association of America  1980
5) Hans Rademacher-Otto Toeplitz “The  Enjoyment of Mathematics”Princeton University Press 1957.
6) R. Courant and Herbert Robbins “What is Mathematics”  Oxford 1969
7) A.D. Aleksndrov, A.N. Kolmogorov, M.A. Lavrentev editos
“Mathematics, its content, methods, and meaning” Vol 1,2,3  MIT press 1963
8) Felix Kaufmann “The Infinite in Mathematics”  D. Reidel Publishing Company 1978
9) Edna E. Kramer “The Nature and Growth of Modern Mathematics”
Princeton University Press 1981
10) G. Polya “Mathematics and plausible reasoning” Vol 1, 2 1954  Princeton University press
11) Maurice Kraitchik “Mathematique des Jeux”  1953  Gauthier-Villars
12) Heinrich Dorrie “100 Great Problems of Elementary Mathematics”
Dover 1965
13) Imre Lakatos “Proofs and Refutations”   Cambridge University Press 1976
“Dtv-Atlas zur Mtahematik” Band 1,2,1974
14) Struik D. J. A Concise History of Mathematics  Dover 1987

15) S. Bochner The Role of Mathematics in the Rise of Science Princeton 1981

16) D.E. Littlewood “Le Passé-Partout Mathematique” Masson et c, Editeurs Paris 1964
17) A concise history of mathematics , by D. J. Struik, Dover 1987

At the end of this chapter, there is 

a) Advantages-disadvantages of these new digital mathematics compared to the classical analogue, infinitary mathematics. 

b) A fictional discussion in dialogue form of celebrated historic creators of the old mathematics praising or questioning the new mathematics compared to the old.

17 The Digital Functional Analysis

This is a course that many things change completely! The remarks made above for analysis, differential equations, probabilities , topology etc apply here. Two functions are equal only up to an accuracy level. An the functions are defined only up to a resolution. 
To define Dirac's Delta (e.g. at zero) , we need two number systems, at two different resolutions. In the coarser resolution the function seems zero every were, and with value not definable at zero, while at the finer resolution, is not zero, everywhere, and finite at zero with a value larger than the largest number of the system of numbers at the coarser resolution .If  integrating at the finer resolution, it gives a number, existing, in the coarser resolution too and equal to 1. All are simple and there is no need for the twisted functional definition of Schwartz, neither of sequential definition of Shilov! Engineers would recognize in this definition of Dirac's Delta, what always had in mind but was never formulated and defined in mathematics, as the concept of finite system of quantities at a specific resolution, had never before been defined in mathematics
All the functions of  functional space are finite many, and the linear space dimension is finite too! Thus the complications of Unbounded, and bounded operators in Hilbert spaces do not exist here. All arguments become easier, and many new theorems of remarkable power can be proved. Although the functions are finite many, they may be large even for a computer according to the depth for a resolution. But making then so many so as to permit a computer to scan them, is always an optimistic attitude as far as trying to prove a theorem in functional analysis.
The interesting theorems are of different nature in the finite resolution functional analysis. E.g. Instead of proving that any "almost periodic" function is a limit of series of purely periodic functions, the interest here is similar to the Shannon-type theorems, concerning the size of the required information:
How large has to me a base of periodic functions to derive exactly at a resolution, and the visible layer a function? And similar many more questions relating the information at the side of base of functions, and at the side of visible accuracy level and depth of resolution.
The complications of the axiom of choice in set theory , disappear too! Let us  look to the celebrated arguments that proves with the axiom of choice in Euclidean geometry that we can cut a finite spherical ball in to finite many pieces, and to resemble them to make two spherical balls of equal radius with the original. In the light of finite resolutions in geometry, the arguments is essentially equivalent to that we can indeed do that but the derived new spherical balls are of lower resolution (so that the sum of the finite many points of the resulting new balls make in total the points of the original ball in higher resolution!)

Creating 3D mental images with the imagination
The physiscists andd nobel prize winner R Feynamnn often was explaining that he was training his imagination imagining in 3D mental images the moving molecules of a gas in  box, and perceiving that temperature as their avearge velocity, the ressure as the average moemntum of the walls of the box, and the density as the average number of particles per unit of volume, He was explaing that he was getting much pleasure from this spiritual excerise of craeting 3D mental images and simulating the reality. 
Excatly this 3D VISUAL MENTAL IMAGES LANGUAGE parctice is  UTILIZED BY ME AND  is  required by someone to understand and develop the digital or natural mathematics, in geometry, real numbers and analysis.
Rules for phantasy and drawing of figures.
As initially we considered a system of digital real numbers R(m,n,p,q) we consider the points of P(m), P(n) as visible in the figures while the points of P(p) as invisble pixels , and those of  P(q) as invisible atoms. Therefore, even the points and seemingly infinitesimals that will be defined below, of P(n) relative to P(m) are considered as visible. This is in accordance with the habit in classical mathematics to make the points visible, although they claim that they have zero size.

16. Digital Stochastic Differential Equations

It is discussed the similarity with the time series. But there is the difference that the digital stochastic differential equations have two levels of precision while classical time series only one level of precision. 



At the end of this chapter, there is 

a) Advantages-disadvantages of these new digital mathematics compared to the classical analogue, infinitary mathematics. 

b) A fictional discussion in dialogue form of celebrated historic creators of the old mathematics praising or questioning the new mathematics compared to the old.

15. Digital Holographic Differential Geometry


Here is where we will need an at lest 3-levels of precision , system of real numbers, to formulate for example Riemann geometry, and differential manifolds with linear differential connections.

Here one visible point of the Riemann geometry manifold will have in it  , a whole digital euclidean space, (the traditional tangent Euclidean space) which already has  its two levels of precision points visible. and invisible (that are nevertheless invisible from the global Riemann geometric space).

The experience of utilizing the Google maps, in the web, gives the idea, but in addition here the scales of precision are discretized, in to at least 3. 

At the end of this chapter, there is 

a) Advantages-disadvantages of these new digital mathematics compared to the classical analogue, infinitary mathematics. 

b) A fictional discussion in dialogue form of celebrated historic creators of the old mathematics praising or questioning the new mathematics compared to the old.


Creating 3D mental images with the imagination
The physiscists andd nobel prize winner R Feynamnn often was explaining that he was training his imagination imagining in 3D mental images the moving molecules of a gas in  box, and perceiving that temperature as their avearge velocity, the ressure as the average moemntum of the walls of the box, and the density as the average number of particles per unit of volume, He was explaing that he was getting much pleasure from this spiritual excerise of craeting 3D mental images and simulating the reality. 
Excatly this 3D VISUAL MENTAL IMAGES LANGUAGE parctice is  UTILIZED BY ME AND  is  required by someone to understand and develop the digital or natural mathematics, in geometry, real numbers and analysis.
Rules for phantasy and drawing of figures.
As initially we considered a system of digital real numbers R(m,n,p,q) we consider the points of P(m), P(n) as visible in the figures while the points of P(p) as invisble pixels , and those of  P(q) as invisible atoms. Therefore, even the points and seemingly infinitesimals that will be defined below, of P(n) relative to P(m) are considered as visible. This is in accordance with the habit in classical mathematics to make the points visible, although they claim that they have zero size.

14. Digital Differential Equations

It is discussed the similarities and differences of the difference equations and digital differential equations (the later have two degrees of precision while the former only one).


APPENDIX

Here are some new methodologies of solving ordinary and partial differential equations within the new axiomatic digital mathematics based on the concept of resolution which is deeper in mathematical ontology than just a grid of points in numerical methods of ODE and PDE. We apply it as example on solving the partial differential equations of Navier-Stokes equations of compressible Newtonian fluids. We deviate from our standard approach to be always only inside the new axiomatic digital mathematics, and we create new techniques within the classical mathematics with the infinite inspired by the techniques of the axiomatic digital mathematics. 

Creating 3D mental images with the imagination
The physiscists andd nobel prize winner R Feynamnn often was explaining that he was training his imagination imagining in 3D mental images the moving molecules of a gas in  box, and perceiving that temperature as their avearge velocity, the ressure as the average moemntum of the walls of the box, and the density as the average number of particles per unit of volume, He was explaing that he was getting much pleasure from this spiritual excerise of craeting 3D mental images and simulating the reality. 
Excatly this 3D VISUAL MENTAL IMAGES LANGUAGE parctice is  UTILIZED BY ME AND  is  required by someone to understand and develop the digital or natural mathematics, in geometry, real numbers and analysis.
Rules for phantasy and drawing of figures.
As initially we considered a system of digital real numbers R(m,n,p,q) we consider the points of P(m), P(n) as visible in the figures while the points of P(p) as invisble pixels , and those of  P(q) as invisible atoms. Therefore, even the points and seemingly infinitesimals that will be defined below, of P(n) relative to P(m) are considered as visible. This is in accordance with the habit in classical mathematics to make the points visible, although they claim that they have zero size.


THE RESOLUTIONS METHODOLOGY IN FINDING AND STUDYING SOLUTIONS OF SYSTEMS OF DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS (E.G.  NAVIER-STOKES PARTIAL DIFFERENTIAL  EQUATIONS).

1)The finite resolutions and their triple equality of quantities (ε, δ, α) , =1, =2, =3 .
(The definition of the finite resolution does no include the intermediate points inside its cuboids. It is a finite set of points, a double lattice, a double grid. But we give a separate definition for infinite resolution when the space-time is unbounded. We prefer to work the NsE project on the periodic formulation, on the compact 3-dimensional torus T3. We give also symbolization of the finite resolution, based on the decimal representation of the real numbers thus of R^n that makes it clear, and also clear the relative distance of the unit pf space, from the minimum pixel size of minimum invisible cuboids=pixels . The mid (double) precision cuboids of a resolution may be already invisible, as elementary volumes, and inside the visible points (low precision) , while the pixels are inside the mid-precision cuboids and are the high (triple) precision. Below we shall see that the high-precision pixels will represent the particles of the fluid. While, the mid-precision cuboids the non-moving elementary volumes on which we observe and state the equations of a fluid. The differences of the values of the magnitudes of the fluid on the adjacent mid-precision elementary volumes, are already below the single precision of the measurement magnitude of the fluid that is the single (low) precision. The single or low precision defines the visible points of the fluid. The bins (ε, δ, α) refer to the visibe points invisble elementary volumes and particle size. The (ε, δ, α) is called the signature of the resolution.There is a natura ordering of resolutions R1<R2 if for their signatures holds (ε1, δ1, α1) <=(ε2, δ,2 α2) respectivelly).
2) Existence or definition of functions on finite resolutions
(Every classical function on R^n space by restriction (inheritance) defines a function finite or infinite resolution. On many resolutions many functions. Conversely we give conditions, that functions on all finite or infinite resolutions as an inductive system define a unique function of R^n or torus T3)
3)Equality of functions on finite resolutions
(Two functions of R^n or torus T3, equal on all resolutions (infinite or finite respectively) are equal functions on R^n or torus T3)
  1. Bottom-up inheritance of functions from a resolution to coarser resolution by averaging or interpolation (Zoom-out).
    Here only the e is increased from the signature (e,d,a). That is only the visible points cuboids are increased not the elementary volumes or particles.
  2. Top-down extension of a function from a resolution to a finer resolution (Zoom-in). Here both the e and d is decreased from the signature (e,d,a). That is the visible points cuboids and the elementary volumes are decreased in size, are refined, not the particles.
5)The continuity on finite resolutions
(The continuity on a resolution is defined by the pixel (infinitesimals) of double decimal precision , as the Leibnitz continuity. No limits. Although the ε-δ definition of Weierstrass does apply very well.)
6)Derivative on finite resolutions
(Similar the definition of derivative and partial derivatives as quotients of double decimal precision pixels (infinitesimals), like the Leibnitz way. No limits)
7)Integration on finite resolution.
( The integral on a finite resolution is simply a finite sum, and double decimal precisions pixels (infinitesimals) are involved)
8)The smoothness on finite resolution
(Smoothness is defined on finite resolution with partial derivatives )
9) The physical natural real minimal resolution R(ε0, δ0, α0).
    For all physical applications of the pfuid dynamics it is required the minimal physical resolution. Hyper-Continuity is referring to this as well as Hyper-smoothness.
10) The Cauchy-Kovalevskaya theorem of local existence and uniqueness of solutions and the resolution-NSE (on a finite resolution).
Since the equality on a finite resolutions is only single-precision on it, the resolution-NSE has
analytic coefficients, as the Taylor expansion becomes zero after a finite number of terms. Therefore the C-K local existence-uniqueness for quasilinear systems of PDE, applies provided we extent the NSE that are quadratic PDE to linear PDE with additional variables. But as we shall see later, we can do better and derive existence and uniqueness of global solutions too.
11) Definition of functions in the classical sense from that of an inductive system of resolutions larger than the minimal physical.
(We give conditions, that functions on all finite or infinite resolutions as an inductive system define a unique function of R^n or torus T3)
12) Characterization of equality of functions in the classical sense from that of an inductive system of finite resolutions larger than the minimal physical.
(Two functions of R^n or torus T3, equal on all resolutions (infinite or finite respectively) are equal functions on R^n or torus T3)
13) Characterization of classical continuity from an inductive system of resolutions larger than the minimal physical. Classical continuity means also continuity on the minimal physical resolution.
(Functions on R^n or T3, that when restricted on any resolution are continuous, are also continuous in the classical calculus sense. The e-d of the Weierstrass apply here. If a function is continuous in the classical sense then the for every e, there is e-1st precision resolution with d-2nd precision such that the inherited function on the resolution r is resolution-continuous. Conversely if the function is discontinuous some where say at a, the there is a resolution with e-1st-precison, such that for any d-2nd-precision the inherited function is resolution-discontinuous. NEVERTHELESS DOES NOT MEAN THAT IF WE HAVE A DISCONTINUOUS IN THE CLASSICAL SENSE FUNCTION, THERE IS NO RESOLUTION SUCH THAT THE INHERITIED FUNCTION IS NOT CONTINUOUS! THERE MAY EXIST A RESOLUTION THAT THE INHERITED FUNCTION (OF THE CLASSICAL DISCONTINUOUS FUNCTION) IS RESOLUTION-CONTINUOUS! ).

14) Characterization of classical smoothness with smoothness from an inductive system of resolutions larger than the minimal physical resolution.Classical smoothness means also smoothness on the minimal physical resolution.
(Functions on R^n or T3, that when restricted on any resolution are smooth , are also in the smooth in the classical calculus sense )

15) Integration in the classical sense from that of an inductive system of resolutions larger than the minimal physical resolution. Integration is also a simple summation on the minimal physical resolution.
(For a Lebesgue and Riemann integrable function on R^n or T3, the integral can be calculated, from the corresponding integrals of the restriction functions on all resolutions)


16) The NSE on finite resolutions and the minimal physical resolution. The resolution-NSE.
The main difficulty  is that the general methods of solutions of the NSE so far, do not involve a systematic theoretical assessment of them, so that general properties of the solutions can be deduced. The numerical methods suffer by that convergence is intervened. While non-numerical methods are not general enough to cover , the general case of the NSE. That is why, the current methodology with the resolutions is the appropriate. We are not concerned with convergence instead we are based on the inductive relation of resolution-solutions and general solutions.
( On a finite resolution, the NSE from the species of PDE, goes to the species of systems of algebraic quadratic equations, through the pixel-deltas. We call it resolution-NSE. The elementary volumes may be interpreted as the single precision cuboids of the resolution where density and pressure of the double-precision cuboids or pixels within the single precision cuboids. In fact we find here 3 different lattices, or grids. The finite, the mid( double)-precision pixel cuboid volumes and the high (triple) precision cuboid volumes.
The high (triple)-precision pixels will represent the particles of the fluid. While, the mid (double)-precision cuboids the non-moving elementary volumes on which we observe and state the equations of a fluid. The differences of the values of the magnitudes of the fluid on the adjacent mid-precision elementary volumes, are double precision magnitudes and already below the single precision of the measurement magnitude of the fluid that is the single (low) precision. The single or low precision defines the visible points of the fluid.
Then the resolution-NSE are simply the ( energy and ) momentum conservation of the single-precision cuboids as non-moving spatial observatory cuboid-windows with the double precision cuboid volumes as particles of the fluids. In other words the elementary-volumes are not parts of the fluid are non-moving abstract special cuboid containers to measure quantities of the fluid the passes through them. The pixel-cuboids of triple (high) precision represent particles of the fluid. The density represents number of such particles in the elementary volume. The pressure, at a wall of the elementary volume , measures the vertical to the wall momentum of each particle that crosses the imaginary wall. Although the density may me constant (incompressibility) the pressure may change, for a single elementary cuboid volume, the vertical momentum crossed at different walls may be different. We must remember that the quantities on the elementary volumes are averages on the pixel-particles. The velocity at the elementary volume is the average sample velocity of the velocities of the particles. And so is the temperature as average norm of velocity of the particles, or the internal energy of the fluid at the elementary cuboid volume. Similarly for the viscosity coefficient and external body-volume forces ad that elementary volume.
Conversely solutions of such resolution-NSE on all resolution, with appropriate inductive compatibility conditions, give solutions of the original NSE. Existence , uniqueness, and smoothness are preserved. Also non-smoothness and finite blow-up times , studied by the species of algebraic quadratic equations, are preserved after the inductive compatibility conditions. We restrict to the 2-dimensional case so that we can compare with the 3-dimesnional case. )



17) The energy of the resolution, in resolution-NSE0.
We may apply ,methods of energy for the velocity generic particle of the normal digital particle fluid, and try to prove that it is impossible , that the velocity will converge to infinite in a finite time, thus refuting the classical result of finite Blow-up time. In this we must take in to indispensable account and be based critically on the non-compressibility at least in the form of constant density, as well as the smoothness of the pressure. We may derive from this some regularity of the statistics. Also we may change the definition of the normal digital particle fluid , so as to have simple proof of the above reduction to absurd.

18) The trajectory path of an elementary volume of the resolution, at a resolution-solution of the resolution-NSE.

19) Local in time existence of resolution-smooth solutions of the resolution-NSE, by the corresponding results in the classical non-resolution setting.

20) Existence in 2-dimensions of global in time resolution-smooth solutions of the resolution-NSE , by the corresponding Ladyzhenskaya result.
In 2-dimensions the phenomenon of vortex axial stretching and split of the vortex to smaller and smaller vortexes and eddies cannot take place. It is a 3-dimensional phenomenon. Still this 3-dimensional mechanism in producing a spectrum of eddies or whirls (the smaller the higher the spin) that traditionally is considered turbulent flow, could still be described with smooth solutions of the NSE ! The Kolmogorov length scale of turbulence indicates that even in turbulence there is a un upper bound to the scale of eddies and an upper bound to the vorticities and their speed norm and thus they do not have the effect of the velocities converging to infinite, as time approaches a particular moment (at the finite Blow-up time) ! 
Of course there are turbulent flows, that may create singularities of very small eddies in other words point of non-smoothness of the flow.
21) The NSE on finite resolutions and systems of intersecting (parabolic) Quadratic equations.
(We apply here the theory of quadratic surfaces, and their normal forms. In particular we prove that the equations of the resolution-NSE are hyperbolic type quadratic equations. )
22) Existence of resolution-NSE resolution-solutions on finite resolution
(Itis proved that the resolution-NSE do have solutions given the initial boundary resolution conditions. We apply the resolution-NSE recursively on all the points of the time/space resolution and we get a finite system of algebraic equations that we call resolution-solution of the resolution-NSE. They represent the energy , mass or number of particles and momentum conservation of finite many pixel cuboids of the resolution. The elementary single precision volumes are simply cuboids that through their magnitudes like density, pressure , velocity etc describe the statistical movements of the double precision pixel cuboids or particles. And the resolution-NSE is simply in words density times (time-acceleration+space-acceleration) of the elemtary-volumes equals force as pressure space-change on elementary volumes and viscosity loss of momentum proportional to second derivatives of the velocity.

Here the relation of Du/dt=∂u/∂t +u(inverse∆)u is utilized (derivative rule of product and composite)
Conservation of the mass or number of particles (continuity equation)

All of these magnitudes as sample-group averages of the sample of pixel-particles in the elementary-volumes of the fluid. The initial Newton’s equation on an elementary volume is a solvable differential equation, and so should be the NSE, that is on a lattice of such elementary volumes. For the existence we start with resolution of minimal number of points we verify the existence and then we utilize induction on the points pf the finite space-time resolution. After all it represent motion of incompressible fluids with energy and momentum conservation. And in out formulation we directly represent the physical atoms of the fluid (as almost incompressible crystal fluid) and volumes of them. If anything must be added to the formulation of the energy and momentum conservation beyond the resolution-NSE we do formulate it, so as derive exactly natures existence and uniqueness of motion of fluids. Incompressibility has a nice interpretation on resolutions as slight compressibility that is not more than double precision pixel magnitude. We restrict to the 2-dimensional case so that we can compare with the 3-dimesnional case. )
23) Uniqueness of solutions of resolution-NSE on finite resolutions
(It is proved that the resolution-NSE not only do have resolution-solutions given the initial boundary resolution conditions but the resolution-solution is unique. After all it represent motion of incompressible fluids with energy and momentum conservation. Incompressibility has a nice interpretation on resolutions as slight compressibility that is not more than double precision pixel magnitude. We restrict to the 2-dimensional case so that we can compare with the 3-dimensional case. )

24) Local smoothness of resolution-solution of the resolution-NSE on finite resolutions (From the previous local classical smoothness of the resolution-solution of the resolution-NSE, we derive local resolution-smoothness of the resolution-solutions of the resolution-NSE. Also a smooth change in the initial conditions will result in local smooth change in the subsequent resolution-solutions. Resolution-solutions of the resolution-NSE evolve smoothly in time)
25) Alternative method: Digital real fluids observable through a finite resolution
26) The resolution-NSE of a digital real fluid
27) Existence of a normal digital real fluid, for the initial (boundary) conditions of the resolution-NSE.
Here we take a deterministic real fluid of equal size particles at pixels of the resolution, and at each elementary cuboid volume inherit, the velocity of the volume, while when it changes elementary volume it experiences a deceleration according to the NSE0 formula of viscosity, while it takes also the other elementary volume velocity of new time step of an implicit defined resolution-solution or keeps the same as alternative rule. The later rule is according to the Newton law and momentum conservation, the first not! But both rules give particle-fluid satisfying the resolutions-NSE0. The former requires to already know one, the later not, and can be used to define one! As time goes on in discrete steps we propagate the motion of particles as of constant velocity along their straight line linear trajectories inside their elementary volumes. (unless they collide or change elementary volumes).
28) The normal digital real fluid evolves locally continuously and smoothly in time.
All of these changes are at double precision, therefore are continuous and smooth at the single precision. Also when particles collide the collision is perfect elastic, and they exchange velocity, but as it is equal as they are in the same volume, it is as if each particle goes through the other without colliding. In case they collide, at the walls of the elementary volumes, again, they exchange velocities, but as the elementary volumes are adjacent again it is a change at double precision an zero at single precision. Therefore we may conclude that the velocities of the particles of the normal real fluid, are continuous in time, and so is the pressure, due to the statistical interpretation of the pressure! Finally as the new velocities of the normal real fluid are averages of the velocities of the particles, we conclude that the field of velocities of the normal real fluid (not that of the particles) is continuous and smooth (1st derivative).
29) Derivation of a resolution-solution of the resolution-NSE, by the evolution of a digital real fluid.
Here we define the elementary volumes velocities and wall-pressures, and densities by the statistical average quantities of the real fluid. Then we repeat the argument as in the derivation of the NSE0, but this time on the normal real fluid. As it is a real fluid that its particles follow the law of motion of Newton, so it happens with the elementary volumes, and therefore the normal real fluid satisfies the resolution-NSE0.
We may mention here the publication of A. Muriel http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1011/1011.6630.pdf
30) Existence and uniqueness of solutions of NSE from that on all resolutions.

(We prove that existence and uniqueness of solutions of the resolution-NSE on all resolutions, derive existence and uniqueness of the solutions of NSE.)






References
W. Hurevicz


Lectures on ordinary Differential Equations

At the end of this chapter, there is 

a) Advantages-disadvantages of these new digital mathematics compared to the classical analogue, infinitary mathematics. 

b) A fictional discussion in dialogue form of celebrated historic creators of the old mathematics praising or questioning the new mathematics compared to the old.